Sean McDowell live Q&A on sexuality, transgender and culture war questions 

OMG Sean, you hit the ball outside the park! Thanks for having him on Justin! Your channel alone with Sean’s work and his channel is relevant to our world today and so encouraging!

When are we going to do an interview with Mike Winger?

Thank you so very much 😊!!

I just found your channel, and I love it. Great host and guests. I especially like listening to Sean McDowell. Great conversation! Thanks, guys.

This book is in my cart and I can't wait to read it. Hoping to take it on vacation!

Thanks keep up a good work

This was my early Christmas gift; two out of three of my favourite Christians ( and so much more than that) on RU-vid in a conversation! Thank you for this, I have enjoyed and learned so much.

Hi Guys....Blessings from SA

Thank y’all (Mr. Brierley & Dr. McDowell) for having this dialogue; thank y’all for being y’all! ♾😎🖖🏻🙏🏻♾ - watching from Escondido, California

I am a woman and I met the Lord in 2013 while in a same sex marriage into which we brought two children into the world through artificial insemination. Since salvation I have wrestled with the issue of homosexuality. In my personal case I am now married to a man in the Lord. It is nice that my children now have a male parental figure as this has been a regret of mine that my children do not have a father, and that I actively contributed to that. With that said, I have co parented the two children I share with my ex wife and Jesus has only lead me to compassion for my ex wife who is not a Christian and who identifies as a Lesbian. I do not think that same sex marriage is God's will for our lives, however, I believe that much harm has been done in the name of God's will to the LGBTQ community. In my life I have many gay and lesbian friends and some who attend our church. I have experienced the most homophobia within the western evangelical church and it is so sad. While I personally do not believe that same sex marriage is God's plan I do accept my LGBTQ loved ones where they are in their walk. For instance, shortly after conversion I continued in the area of sexual sin having sex with males outside of marriage. I even brought these men to church with me. I see many "fornicators" at church and they are rarely being called out for this sin. So we are sinners in need of a savior. It is not my position to judge gay and lesbian people. As I think most Christians would have an issue if I were calling out the adulterers, fornicators, and other sexual sins that are present in our world - I think of people who use porn and prostitutes as well. It would be odd if I were to talk about this in conversation randomly. It is within a close relationship where I can encourage and pray with people who are most likely already converted. I have a niece who lives with her partner who is a woman; she is not converted and I pray for her conversion and then pray God speaks to her like he did to me. Although I do not believe this is God's will for her sexuality, I do love and accept my niece and affirm where she is at. I leave this to the Lord to speak to her and pray for her conversion and then God will lead and guide her to His will for her sexuality. I realize that this may make me a lazy Christian who stands by and watches others in their sin and does nothing about it, but many people are sinning all around me and I do not feel it is my place to correct them. That is the work of the Holy Spirit and God. I am to love them, to pray for them, and to show them the love and compassion of Christ Jesus.

Wow! Great to see two of my favourites on the show!

Thank you so much Justin and Sean for this conversation, helping us to stand up for the truth with grace. Justin, I just wanted to speak to what you said starting at around minute 49:15. You mentioned a white, European person vs. someone from a minority background. I believe that is a very limited way to look at God's children around the world; dividing them into these two groups.

I'm very interested in this conversation with Sean! Q: I believe Scripture is inspired by God and that the authors of Scripture wrote using their languages and worldviews to communicate what God intends. Is it possible that much of Scripture was written from the heterosexual perspective using what the majority agreed upon as the ideal of marriage even though it may not have been what God intended as the ideal? The Bible undoubtedly has the marks of its human authors. Is it possible that the Bible is a mixture of God's intentions written through the lens of the ideals of the human authors?

From the state of Maine in USA

I agree that Sean is an excellent testimony and example of how to engage with the culture around us in a gracious and Christ-like manner. I appreciate his ministry so much.

My approach is one of charity for everybody. My desire is to know and understand JESUS and everyone has to make up their own mind about how to live their life.

A sane and kind conversation

Whether you're an atheist or christian, the flesh ends in empty vanity. Ecc 2:10,11

Massachusetts first time

To compare incest with lifelong committed homosexual legal marriage is ludicrous. The obvious difference between the two is informed consent.

What a conversation 👏 👏 👏

In this interview, Sean is asked why he views same-sex relationships - even the many same-sex relationships that are loving and faithful and do no harm to others - as being categorically wrong. In response, Sean poses this question: If one affirms loving and consenting same-sex relationships, then wouldn’t the “logical conclusion” be that, hypothetically, one must also affirm loving and committed incestuous relationships? I don’t think there is a “logical” equation to be drawn between same-sex relationships and incestuous ones. The prevalence of gay and lesbian relationships emerges from same-sex orientation, which is not chosen; sexual orientation is part of who someone is and how they experience the world from childhood on. An incestuous relationship, on the other hand, is a deliberate choice. Nobody is born experiencing attraction only to their siblings or cousins. Incestuous relationships do not emerge as a part of one’s innate identity, therefore to deny people the right to engage in them is not to deny their fundamental humanity. Next, while there are countless examples of committed and loving LGBTQ+ relationships, there are no parallel, widespread examples of healthy, loving incestuous relationships, at least not that I’m aware of. I think that the burden of proof would be on Sean to point out where all these supposedly healthy and committed incestuous relationships are happening. I’m guessing he won’t find them, and he ought to ask himself why that is before drawing such a comparison. The comparison lacks any connection to the reality on the ground. We might also point out that the presence of LGBTQ relationships helps to support the kind of diversity and change that is needed for human society to grow and flourish, whereas incestuous relationships by definition do not promote flourishing at the community level. They don’t result in the coming-together of separate families, tribes, clans, etc. Incestuous relationships contain other potential harms, for instance when it comes to genetic defects in procreation. There are probably other arguments to be made, but I’m just saying that the comparison between the two really doesn’t have a logical underpinning and is not grounded in any sociological, biological, or psychological realities. Christians ought to stop making these kinds of comparisons. I think Sean’s purpose in drawing the comparison may have been to push back against the idea that mutual love and faithfulness are sufficient evidence that a relationship is blessed by God. I know that, in Sean’s interpretation, scripture condemns any kind of same-sex relationship or behavior regardless of how committed and loving the relationship is. I think it’s more productive when Sean makes those kinds of arguments based on his interpretation of the Bible, even though I disagree with them as well! Here’s another thought: the initial question contains some deeper philosophical and theological issues that Sean could have responded to. For example, Why would something that seems good to us (i.e. full of the fruits of the spirit) be condemned by God? What do we do when something seems good to us but appears to be condemned in the Bible? Can we find some scriptural guidance for this kind of situation? Did God give us the ability to recognize goodness without resorting to what scripture says?

Australia

People are changing their views on God's standards because of the culture. 'The fear of man is a snare'. To enter God's kingdom is going to COST all of us, we all need to 'take up our cross'. Holding on to the pleasures and desires of the flesh will ultimately destroy us.

Can grace honestly coexist with unequal prohibitions like those against gay marriage? Doesn't it seem like they will always lead you to contempt? How does Sean feel about the label "crotch christianity"?

I'm grateful for Sean's ministry! I love the way he thinks through things with grace and his appeal to LISTEN! Sean briefly mentioned bringing a same-sex marriage argument to its natural conclusion. I can understand why he wants to separate the logical argument from the emotional baggage his statement carries. If marriage is simply about mutual attraction, why not allow for incestuous relationships. I think the answer is that same-sex relationships don't allow for the possibility of genetic deformities in their offspring. The argument could continue - "why not allow for incestuous marriage if the people involved agree to be sterilized?" With respect to my homosexual brothers and sisters, this line of questioning seems as outrageous as discussing same-sex marriage seemed to the vast majority just a few decades ago. I'm curious about where these questions lead.

"What is marriage?" McDowell asks. It seems very important to him. Marriage is a civil institution. It is a contract between two people in a long term committed that reconciles a host of practical issues (financial, tax, property, custody, medical decision-making) and provides legal status to that relationship. I know this because you have to get a license from the state and you can be legally married without any involvement of any religious organization. Indeed, even non-Christian's can get married! If you want proof that marriage is a civil institution, that proof is abundant. What conservative Christian's have is God and the Bible. McDowell says this is something that we need to be sure we get right. I agree. If you intend to restrict my rights, I would simply ask you to provide objective and verifiable proof that the Christian God exists and the Bible represents His will. A signed and notarized affidavit would be sufficient. Until then, it's just the opinion of some self-appointed guy.

This conversation in a nutshell: _"Love the sinner, hate the sin."_ There! I just saved you one hour. You're welcome.

Here is the deal with fruit: every day real people living their truth, being healthy, loving others. It is born out of love and no harm is seen. Your denying someone who they are at their core damages them psychologically and emotionally. So who are the people actually producing fruit? Where is the need to be repentant when nothing is wrong and people flourish their entire lives? The repentance is on the theology and letter of the law that obviously harms and the majority of people attest to this.

Most of the world goes like this Lgbtqp......the Americans lost their mind but we will continue playing this nonsense 1234 righta

Thank you for an excellent discussion and I am glad Sean is staying loyal with the Word. Unfortunately I wont be listening to the discussion with Keller because he does not minister in a way that would suggest that he views the Word as authoritative. Perhaps ask him why he turned woke.

Nonsense, Jesus spoke of hell and consequent of sin more than any one. No if's and buts. He called it out for what it is. Stop this duplicity in order to sell more books. We have the Bible check the Hebrew and Greek text if you need more confirmation.

To Sean: I would suggest a book called, 'Bible, Gender, Sexuality: Reframing the Church's Debate on Same-Sex Relationships' by John Brownson. It digs into scripture concerning same-sex attraction and showed me that there ARE different ways to look at the same verse, the same word, and of course, cultures. I don't think it really is as clear as we have been taught to believe. This book (and others) really helped me when my Christian son came out with his declaration of being gay.

Much of the church's teaching on homosexuality is similar to saying to a left-handed person, " it's ok to feel left-handed as long as you don't commit left hand actions". And you wouldn't say to a left-handed person that they are "left hand use attracted". In my experience homosexuality is not a mere attraction; it is a state of being, the way a minority love romantically.

the "church" is not the authority, the scripture is, just because one doesn't agree with any type of behavior the bible condemns doesn't mean we hate those who practice those behaviors, either the scripture is ones authority or its not

Once again Sean shows us that he's created an idol in his own image according to his own ways, will, and wisdom and named it "Jesus". Sean does state accurately what the End Game is. The problem is that he continues to hold to the MAN-Centered theology that doesn't realize the End Game is to advance the Kingdom of GOD and NOT that god that he's conjured up in his mind. On that note, I have a question for Sean. How does he see Christ advancing the Kingdom of God at the end of the Book? Regarding the question about Name-Calling, that was a terrific example of just what I talked about above and Sean took the bait, hook, line, and sinker. What he should have said is, "What's wrong with name-calling? Jesus did it. Aren't we to be followers of Jesus?" You see? He talks about asking questions and such but ONLY when it advanced his agenda for Compassion, Tone, etc. The Truth is Jesus calling others names is there for a reason. There IS a time and place for it. Sean's faulty MAN-Centered theology further cones out and shows itself when he talks about building relationships with those who stand in opposition to Christ and cling to their sin. WHERE in all of Scripture do you see Jesus building a relationship with anyone who chose to cling to their sin and practice their sin? Jesus actually taught the opposite. Furthermore, Scripture is clear. Followers of Christ are to have NO fellowship with darkness but rather expose it. I would encourage and exhort all those watching this video to watch and listen carefully THRU the filter of Scripture. Is what's being said Biblical? Here's a specific example. Sean quotes some guy who says "The way you love someone is to listen." Is that true? WHERE in ALL of Scripture are we told that?? Is that how Jesus said we love Him? (Jn. 14:15) WHERE is this stuff coming from? If the Holy Spirit then WHY is it NOT accompanied with Scripture?? I submit that listening to someone could actually be a form of Hatred and sin against God. I submit that the MOST loving thing we can do is follow the example that Jesus gave with the man at the pool of Bethesda and first ask, "Do you want to be healed?" Another stark example of where Sean's theology jumps the tracks is in his answer to the question regarding the Church's responsibility to pass laws regarding things like SSM. NOTE what he falls back on and what he runs away from. It's Pro. 14:12 vs. 3:5-7 all over again. Human Natural Law vs, God's Law. IOW, Man's goodness vs. God's goodness. There's no mention of Romans 13. Looks at all the things he rattles off to look at! Where is God in all that? At best in the backseat. "You look at what's good for Society." Based on what? Well, he just told you and God wasn't mentioned once. Do you see it? Sean is not part of the solution. He's part of the problem! One last word to drive that point home as it's seen again in the question regarding the engaged couple who has immediate family that are Trans. NOTE the PATTERN. Where do you see Jesus doing that? And he says that right after saying that Christians are NOT to show partiality! What did Jesus say about Him, those who follow Him, and family? Sean doesn't even mention Matt. 10. Which is key passage to consider! NOTE what else is NOT said. Sean says "You don't have to proclaim..." and yet he makes NO mention of what Jesus COMMANDS His followers TO proclaim!! All I'll say about that is I sure hope the two of them sat down and had a good, doggone LONG talk about all the "what if's" and deal with them now before they wedding rather than later after the wedding. Oh yeah, and I also wanted to say that Matthew Vines and Justin Lee are NOT "Brothers". They are wolves in sheep clothing. Scripture is clear on that. Anyone practicing sin can NOT be a Christian. That's NOT said to be a flaming arrow. The worst, most unloving thing we can do is tell someone who is standing in opposition to Christ that they are a Christian. Came back to say that I just finished the 2hr debate between Sean and Matthew. If Sean should see this I'd recommend he get the book "It's Good To Be A Man, read it, and incorporate the truths it relays about the roles of Man, Woman, Husband, and Wife in the Creation Design. He should find that adds to much of what he said. One other thing I'd like him to consider. The objection Matthew took to the word Homosexual as being offensive to the one who "identifies" as "Gay" was palpable. Why? Is it probably because it is a self-condemning word? Also NOTE the "identifies as". That was 4yrs ago and here we are today debating on what is a woman! Aiding and abetting one is the perpetuation of a lie is a MOST unloving thing to do. For the wages of sin is death.

Uh- Sean. I know dozens of gay couples and their kids who flourish. They have great lives. These kids are some of the most put together people I know. Why? Because the parents are involved with them and love them unconditionally. Stop with the natural marriage is better. Oy. What a crock.

"Faithful, monogamous, committed" relationships is the argument given, but the LGBTQ community admits that their relationships are "monogam-ish". and sexual relationships outside their "marriage" are the norm. They enter "marriage" with no expectation of 100% fidelity the way heterosexuals do. (This is based on a number of studies that have been done.)

Let's suppose that I happily fell in love with another man and we wanted to marry. What harm would that alone do to anyone?

Listening back to these kinds of conversations 2 years after my deconversion, it strikes me how radicalized and extreme these views are, and how far gone I was myself. This is why it's so important to continue the ideological fight against any religion that aims to drag us back to pre-enlightenment thinking. If any of you experience the house of cards that is apologetics come crumbling down before your eyes as I have, you will feel utterly disgusted at yourself for allowing the writings of an hysterical 1st century doomsday cult to dictate your views on any issue.

So how do you conclude the Jesus reached out so much to the marginalized? The Bible cites a few examples out of 3 years. The other 93% of His ministry was spent with His own people. The Jews. Don't you think reading the life of Jesus from the Bible should be done in it's context? His family were Jews, His disciples were Jews, He was raised in a Jewish society. Learned and taught in Jewish synagogues. Had Jewish friends life Martha, Mary, and Lazarus. Just because the Holy Spirit provided a few examples, don't make the mistaken assumption that the majority of His ministry was on the "marginalized." The fact that there is almost no history on Him prior to His ministry proves He was a normal unremarkable Jewish man. Stop feeding the egos of people who need them resized as much if not more than the majority classes.

Women=women, obvious. Transwomen=transwomen, obvious. So transpeople exists if they say they exist. But Transwomen=women implies: All women=transwomen because trans is not an adjective because it ALTERS the definition on what it should describe! So transwomen becomes a collective name, and when we put trans women=transwomen we therefore get that the words women and trans-women point to the same, so the rules of logic (A=B => B=A) gives; all-women=transwomen, but that is obvously false, so we have a contradiction, and a proof that transwomen=women is false.(This does not work with blonde-women=women => all-women=blonde-women because blonde-women is not a name because blonde is an adjective, and a description of only some women, not all. Hence the mathematical proof of the falseness of the claim that trans-women=women.

There is no reason scientifically or Biblically to say that marriage is anything other than one man and one woman, marriage is a sexed institutions..Indeed! Sean is right, and the way he approached it is thoughtful and gracious.

Nobody needs to explain it to Sean or anybody else. It’s their life and their decision. Mind your own business.

I wonder if that jacket he's wearing is mixed fabric ? Nice to see that he can change ideas on the creation of the universe, but apparently not on ssm. I guess it doesn't suit him. On marriage, he clearly doesn't know the marriages of the early fathers of the religion - concubines, hundreds of wives, wives as property etc. Very selective, or very ignorant, or both.

People like This two are the reason why God will start the judgement with He's house.

The T stands for trans already

I can’t help but wonder what Sean’s stance on slavery would have been if he existed in the early to mid 1800s. Scripture supports slavery in some ways and Abraham owned slaves, Paul told slaves to obey their masters. God never called out slavery or put it into the law of the Ten Commandments. Slavery is Biblical.

Remember, if you delete the messages you will only speed up your judgment and your torment will get worse and you will die sooner. Every time you reteach a lie or collect more money for ministering the same thing happens.

As a gay guy, nothing sounds more condescending to me than, "God loves you, but we are all sinners." No wonder you are losing the younger generation.

Animal don't even practice gay married

Now, I am Elijah of Malachi 4 5-6, the 4Runner to the return of jesus. Before Jesus returns , Matthew 17:11 Elijah must come and restore all things. That means any discrepancies in the Bible are decided by me. I am a woman that is male in gender. Prophet said my wedding is already paid for it and will be broadcasted all over the world. Jesus was transgender and will return as a woman.

Hopefully these guys will be reasonable and recognize that spewing religious nonsense may sometimes lead to negative consequences. If a person legitimately BELIEVES that God HATES homosexuality and desires to kill those who participate in it how can we move forward as a nation? If your God says he hates something and that it is detestable OF COURSE you may act according to these BELIEFS.

Sean you're too old to be wearing your hair like that.

Sean McDowell is completely distorting Jesus teaching in Matthew regarding knowing goodness by its fruit. The phenomenology of the gay experience is emminently relevant to questions of goodness of doctrine. Otherwise you are basically positing a creation-negative, death-dealing spirituality that is akin to demonolatry, not a "pro-life" teaching at all. It's akin to those pro-slavers that read the Bible, saw no condemnations of slavery as such, and concluded that slavery is a "good" thing because it lets African-Americans be raised as Christians and "learn" through "hard work" so they can get a reward in the hereafter. Yet I would hope today that Christians would anathematize such defenses of slavery as spiritual delusions.

Marriage is a man made concept. It is whatever people want it to be

In a sane world, being pro-life would mean being pro-Medicare for All, pro-gender-affirming care, pro-Green New Deal, and pro-gun safety.

To me, the Bible seems like a cruel, homophobic, misogynist, pro-slavery book that was written by primitive and territorial men. I would propose leaving this book behind and thinking for ourselves. Everyone of us is more moral than the god of the Bible and the people in its stories! It worries me, that so many people refer to such a book, when adressing morality. Wouldn't you agree?

What a shame this channel has stopped doing shows on the truth or otherwise of Christian beliefs. It used to be something unique, now it’s just one more boring Christian show with no connection to reality.

This man is so clever but far removed from understanding Christ and his message. Evil dressed in seductive words.

Not only is the same sex marriage not a sin, but God prefers it. Matthew 19:12 Eunuchs that are born that way are transgender. Eunuchs made that way by others were abused. Those that choose to live like Eunuchs for the sake of the Kingdom of heaven are bisexual people that choose partners of the same sex but opposite in gender. Leviticus, corinthians, and Timothy were translated wrong on purpose by Billy Graham the money hungry wolf. Those verses are referring to pedophilia. Romans 1 is not referring to Eunuchs where one partner is transgender. In fact, God did it on purpose because they were trying to procreate during orgies so it wouldn't fit for same-sex couples anyhow. All of the men were male and regards to gender and all of the women were female. It is same gender that is wrong, not the same sex.